Note: This is a public test instance of Red Hat Bugzilla. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback at bugzilla.redhat.com.

Bug 1755815

Summary: boot failure after upgrade from RHEL 7 to RHEL 8: missing mandatory option for `users`.
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 Reporter: Petr Stodulka <pstodulk>
Component: grub2Assignee: Bootloader engineering team <bootloader-eng-team>
Status: CLOSED ERRATA QA Contact: Release Test Team <release-test-team>
Severity: unspecified Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: 8.1CC: amahdal, fmartine, mbanas, mgazdik, pjanda, pravisha, wchadwic
Target Milestone: rcKeywords: Upgrades
Target Release: 8.1   
Hardware: ppc64le   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: grub2-2.02-78.el8 Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: 1693515 Environment:
Last Closed: 2019-11-05 22:24:10 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Petr Stodulka 2019-09-26 09:27:56 UTC
+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #1693515 +++

We discovered the same issue that has been fixed already on Fedora. In short,
after the upgrade to RHEL 8 system we are stucked in grub shell. This is specific for POWER machines on PowerVM - virtualized.

This is blocker for in-place upgrades on virtualized POWER machines and we need the fix delivered in RHEL 8.1 GA (ASAP for another testing purposes).

Comment 9 Alois Mahdal 2019-09-26 19:11:56 UTC
Notes for automated testing:

   morf upg -a ppc64le el7toel8 @noop -- --hostrequire '<key_value key="CPUMODEL" op="like" value="%POWER8E%"/>'

should get upgrade on suitable machine, although the require node here is wild guess (based on years old rhel6>rhel7 issue where we had to avoid powervm) and there's probably better way.

Alternatively,

   morf upg -a ppc64le el7toel8 @noop -- --machine suitable.machine.example.com

Adding --brew-task should work as well, updating the machine first with eg. Javier's build:

   morf upg -a ppc64le el7toel8 @noop -- --hostrequire '<key_value key="CPUMODEL" op="like" value="%POWER8E%"/>' --brew-task=23736760

I'm going to try it right now and also add test case to morf so that we can verify it later more easily.

Comment 11 Alois Mahdal 2019-09-27 10:40:00 UTC
Oh wait I did not realize --brew-task won't work because it will try to bolt the package on rhel7 but this fix is on rhel8 side.  I'll come up with something better.

Comment 21 Alois Mahdal 2019-10-03 13:33:23 UTC
Currently the status is:

 *  rhel-alt ppc64le - fixed  (old fails, new is OK)
 *  rhel     ppc64le - fixed  (old fails, new is OK)

For regression test, I also tried to run it with x86_64 but it looks like it's broken for another reasons which I still need clarified by Petr.

 *  rhel     x86_64  - ??? (blocked w/ another poblem that kills the test much earlier)

We can take care of verifying this in context of upgrade.  However, I presume RTT also have their regression testing process, so just let's make sure we're not avoiding that.

Comment 22 Alois Mahdal 2019-10-03 14:33:08 UTC
OK, so we've found out:  the repo provided by Javier was invalid; did not contain all files from the build (missing noarch).  Javier, did you use some Brew feature to create the repo?  If so, there could be bug to report.

Anyway, I'm going to find or create a repo manually and use that to re-run the suite.

Comment 23 Javier Martinez Canillas 2019-10-03 14:47:52 UTC
(In reply to Alois Mahdal from comment #22)
> OK, so we've found out:  the repo provided by Javier was invalid; did not
> contain all files from the build (missing noarch).  Javier, did you use some
> Brew feature to create the repo?  If so, there could be bug to report.
> 
> Anyway, I'm going to find or create a repo manually and use that to re-run
> the suite.

The repo is valid. But may need to include both for x86_64 and i686 arches depending on which set of grub2 packages you have installed.

Comment 24 Petr Stodulka 2019-10-03 14:58:39 UTC
No, it is not valid Javier. There is not grub2-pc-modules-2.02-78.el8.noarch.rpm inside the repo for x86_64 that should be there.

Comment 25 Petr Stodulka 2019-10-03 14:59:26 UTC
Adding that one rpm extra into the transaction resolved whole problem.

Comment 26 Alois Mahdal 2019-10-03 16:06:08 UTC
Looking at compose, what rhel-8 normally includes in repo is x86_64 and noarch. (I can't see any i686.)  The repo is indeed missing at least this one particular .noacrh file (while at the same time other .noarch files were present).  It almost looks as if there was if there was some failure while copying the files.

Anyway, I've composed own repo (x86_64 + noarch) and I'm now running tests against it:

   https://liver3.brq.redhat.com/jenkins/view/OAMG/job/oamg-dispatch-adhoc/241/console

(Note that once we get the package in a compose or stage, we can---and eventually will---re-run tests again.)

Comment 27 Alois Mahdal 2019-10-03 21:32:02 UTC
So apart from some minor waivable issues (leftover packages etc.)  the above tests passed.  Ie. status:

 *  rhel-alt ppc64le - fixed  (old fails, new is OK)
 *  rhel     ppc64le - fixed  (old fails, new is OK)
 *  rhel     x86_64  - unaffected (old OK, new OK)

Thanks for the fix, Javier!


Rest is up to RTT, I guess.

Comment 30 errata-xmlrpc 2019-11-05 22:24:10 UTC
Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2019:3587